Was Masood fighting for the Soviets?

[ScimitarXEdge]

Here's a much more clear example; since I'm sure you'll try and find flaw in my last post as being not explicitly dealing with War


During the first Afghan Anglo War

read where it says

" In 1838, Auckland, Ranjit Singh and Shuja signed an agreement.."

http://books.google.com/books?id=aH_...nistan&f=false

[roadrunner]

Most of the current Pashtun natiomalists in Pakistan were Pro Soviet.

people like this guy

The Soviets would have wanted Pashtunistan to access the southern ports. That's no surprise.

You mean Pashtun Nationalists, not Secular Pashtuns.

[ScimitarXEdge]

The Soviets would have wanted Pashtunistan to access the southern ports. That's no surprise.

You mean Pashtun Nationalists, not Secular Pashtuns.

they're one in the same. Secular Pashtuns grew out of those Nationalists and Vice versa. I never said it was a surprise; I'm saying that Pashtuns aren't all really Pashtuns ; it takes more than ethnic links to be one. You have to live like one. You can be from the greatest Khel, and chant slogans for how Pashtun you are and still be not Pashtun at heart.

[roadrunner]

http://books.google.com/books?id=yvN...ritish&f=false


read where it says "the Multani Pathans were loyal to the British"

There's no text. Give a proper reference that I can read straightaway from the link.

But I'll assume it says that, whatever a "Multani Pathan" is. How are Multani Pathans the majority of Pashtuns?

If you want to prove that Pashtuns don't pay attention to tribal codes and switch sides, you need to provide examples of when the majority of Pashtuns sided with the foreign invaders instead of just one tribe or so. (the "Multani Pathan").

[roadrunner]

they're one in the same. Secular Pashtuns grew out of those Nationalists and Vice versa. I never said it was a surprise; I'm saying that Pashtuns aren't all really Pashtuns ; it takes more than ethnic links to be one. You have to live like one. You can be from the greatest Khel, and chant slogans for how Pashtun you are and still be not Pashtun at heart.

That's not what I argued. En masse is what I'm arguing about.

[roadrunner]

Here's a much more clear example; since I'm sure you'll try and find flaw in my last post as being not explicitly dealing with War


During the first Afghan Anglo War

read where it says

" In 1838, Auckland, Ranjit Singh and Shuja signed an agreement.."

http://books.google.com/books?id=aH_...nistan&f=false

Shuja is one person isn't it?

[ScimitarXEdge]

Shuja is one person isn't it?

he was leader of his clan wasn't he? his clan followed his orders didn't they? he ruled people didn't he?

[ScimitarXEdge]

That's not what I argued. En masse is what I'm arguing about.

You're switching the goal posts; we're talking about people, specific people, like Massoud, why does it have to be "en masse".

Notice I said clans and tribes, and Shah Shuja represented both his clan and tribe. So there you go.

[roadrunner]

So was Karzai (Popalzai).

[ScimitarXEdge]

So was Karzai (Popalzai).

I'm not defending karzai; heh

I'm just saying Pashtuns aren't always good people. I wish it was the case but it's not.

[Catya Sher]

Re the ANP : yes they aided and abetted Najib's Khad agents in NWFP, as it was called then.
They sheltered them, gave them all sorts of help in setting off huge bombs
all over Peshawar and region.

I was there and there was about a bomb every day.

Of course, the Western media never talked about THAT terror.
Only NOW do they make a big deal about every problem - some caused or sponsored by themselves, of course - because it makes the world see Pakistan as weak and wobbly. Hence needing to be taken over by America lock stock and barrel.

About Massoud, I interviewed his brother the now notorious Ahmad Zia.
He gave a bunch of background detail, including his brother's close reading of Mao and Che Guevara during his exile years in Pakistan from 1974 on.

Somewhere along the way, Massoud picked up a bit of French.
This was the key for the French medical organization Medecins Sans Frontieres
to begin sending medical teams and even hospitals to the Panjsher.
Thus developed a long, close relationship between the French and Massoud.

Many French photographers, journalists, aid workers, etc made trips to meet Massoud; thus there was a constant stream of contact.
These in turn popularized Massoud upon return to France.

For American readers, it was Edward Girardet's reporting for The Christian Science Monitor building up Massoud into a super-hero which brought him to American recognition.

Thus American writers started making the pilgrimage to meet Massoud, too.
It was an item of prestige for them.

That's the perspective in the 80s.
I never met him, didn't care.
I never felt he was so great as everyone claimed.
Even the Monitor's articles did not QUITE ring true.

Sure enough, now we know there was much more behind the scenes.

[Catya Sher]

Just for the info, the founder of MSF, Bernard Kouchner, later became Minister of Health.
He is a prominent Bilderberger participant.
Very suspicious.
Kind of a leftist too as I recall.
So who knows WHERE all those inner links led ?
If he promoted Massoud then the corridors of power all got on the bandwagon.

PS: From wikipedia the full info:

Born to a Jewish father and a Protestant mother, he began his political career as a member of the French Communist Party (PCF), from which he was expelled in 1966 for attempting to overthrow the leadership.[1] On a visit to Cuba in 1964, Kouchner spent the night fishing and drinking with Fidel Castro.[2] In the protests of May 1968, he ran the medical faculty strike committee at the Sorbonne. Kouchner has three children (Julie, Camille and Antoine) by his first wife, Évelyne Pisier, a professor of law, and one child, Alexandre, by his present wife Christine Ockrent, a television journalist. He founded Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) in 1971, and then, due to a conflict of opinion with MSF chairman Claude Malhuret, the Doctors of the World ('Médecins du Monde') in 1980. Minister in left-wing governments.
From 1988, he began his government career in Socialist governments, though he was not always a member of the French Socialist Party. He became 'Secrétaire d'état', a lower position in the Cabinet, for Humanitarian Action in 1988, then Minister of Health in 1992, under Mitterrand's presidency. etc.

He was also a UN Special Representative to Kosovo and some argue he did exactly what ordered by the power elites.

So one can see how close these connections were.

Leftists in France must have raved over Massoud, especially with the Che Guevara chic...
Pashtun leaders were totally the opposite. Hence attracted almost NO attention from the French government.
Amin Wardak also hosted many French doctors to Wardak. He might have been the sole exception.

[roadrunner]

You're switching the goal posts; we're talking about people, specific people, like Massoud, why does it have to be "en masse".

Notice I said clans and tribes, and Shah Shuja represented both his clan and tribe. So there you go.

I'm not moving any posts.

This started it. I said

Pashtun clans are probably less pliable than Tajiks generally. If you want to install puppets, you need people who don't adhere to any codes too strictly.

(generally meaning not one or two tribes, but en masse)

You replied

of course; but you forget in Pashtun history it has happened where certain clans and tribes have switched sides and often fight amongst each other. It's happening right now as we speak.

Thinking about it, even Communists would adhere to codes. I was thinking more of selling out nations, or switching sides to whoever is winning. Something unprincipled. An en masse group that would sell itself out would be ideal as a puppet government. The puppet government would have more support that way.

[ScimitarXEdge]

I'm not moving any posts.

This started it. I said

Pashtun clans are probably less pliable than Tajiks generally. If you want to install puppets, you need people who don't adhere to any codes too strictly.

(generally meaning not one or two tribes, but en masse)

You replied

of course; but you forget in Pashtun history it has happened where certain clans and tribes have switched sides and often fight amongst each other. It's happening right now as we speak.

Thinking about it, even Communists would adhere to codes. I was thinking more of selling out nations, or switching sides to whoever is winning. Something unprincipled. An en masse group that would sell itself out would be ideal as a puppet government. The puppet government would have more support that way.

Well the fact is there are Tajiks who sold out and there are Pashtuns who sold out. There are Tajiks who fought graciously and with honor and there are pashtuns who fought graciously with honor.

leave it at that.

[roadrunner]

Well the fact is there are Tajiks who sold out and there are Pashtuns who sold out. There are Tajiks who fought graciously and with honor and there are pashtuns who fought graciously with honor.

Right, and those would be..?

Masoud? Oh no, we just worked that one out.

Dostum? Oh no again, we know he was Mr Chameleon.

Any others?

leave it at that.

I find it the height of hypocrisy that you say to "leave it at that" when it comes to anything negative towards Tajiks, yet will be critical of anything Panjabi related (or won't call to leave it at that).

In fact, I really wanted to know from you guys the ways in which Pakistan interfered with Afghanistan, to the detriment of Afghanistan, post Afghan-Soviet war, and I was met with a load of blank, pimply faces.

Why should any one group be immune from criticism when all others are fair game?